Talk:City Developments Limited

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that City Developments Limited first introduced the usage of show houses in Asia in 1965, giving prospective property buyers a taste of soon-to-be developed properties? Source: Window shopping for homes - The Straits Times, 12 December 1965 via NewspaperSG archives
  • ALT1 ... that City Developments Limited first introduced the usage of show houses in Asia in 1965? Source: Window shopping for homes - The Straits Times, 12 December 1965 via NewspaperSG archives

• Comment: Reviewer to take note, the article was AfD twice due to copyvio reasons. This version was first created by a paid COI contributor, Yang Alexandra. However, myself (Robertsky, with no COI with City Developments Limited) and TheGreatSG'rean have took on to expand the draft, and reviewing/editing/removing the COI contributions in the process.

Moved to mainspace by Robertsky (talk) and TheGreatSG'rean (talk). Nominated by Robertsky (talk) at 07:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC).

• Hello, I am interesting in reviewing this nomination. How would the nominators feel about a shorter ALT that omitted the wording after 1965? Flibirigit (talk) 03:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• @Flibirigit: I am OK with a shorter ALT as proposed. – robertsky (talk) 05:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - ?
• Neutral: - ?
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: - ?

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - ?
• Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Article was moved to mainspace on June 7 (at 01:47) and nominated the same day. Length is adequate. Some entries in the "Notable projects" section are not sourced. There are close paraphrasing isses noted here which need to be addressed. The article is neutral in tone except for the sections with close paraphrasing. Put these sections into different words will solve both issues. The shorter hook ALT0a is more interesting than the longer ALT0. The source for the hook states "believed to be unique in Asia", which is not white the same thing as "introduced ... in Asia". Some adjustment is needed here in the text and the hook. The citation for the hook uses {{cite web}} when it should be {{cite news}} since it is an online newspaper article being cited. No photo is used in this nomination, and the two images used in the article are properly licensed. QPQ is not required since the nominator has fewer than five credits. As a friendly suggestion, I recommend lengthening the introduction, but it is not required for the nomination to be passed. Overall the article is in decent condition and will pass with some minor changes. Flibirigit (talk) 17:56, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: will get around addressing the issues this weekend. – robertsky (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky: I see you have done some work on the article. Do you plan any more updates? Is it okay to go ahead with the review? Flibirigit (talk) 08:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: I am still updating the notable projects section, sourcing for references, while uncovering additional details. This should be done by the weekend if I am not distracted. @TheGreatSG'rean:, would you like to assist on adding some sources as well? As for the hook, the crux would be the phrase 'believed to be'. Given that it had happened in 1965, finding printed sources from other countries to back the claim of being the first may be tedious. As such, I think the hook can be modified further, ALT2 "... that City Developments Limited was one of the first to introduce the usage of show houses in Asia in 1965? Source: Window shopping for homes - The Straits Times, 12 December 1965 via NewspaperSG archives" or similar to effect an approximation to the claim instead? – robertsky (talk) 11:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay, we can work with the revised hook. Please comment here when the other items are ready. Flibirigit (talk) 15:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: paraphrasing issue should be resolved as well. I am done putting up the references for the notable projects. You can continue with your review. Thanks! – robertsky (talk) 01:03, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky:, thank you for the many improvements. The nomination now meets DYK criteria for sourcing, neutrality and paraphrasing. My only concern is the wording in ALT2 that says "was one of the first". While I understand that is a logical conclusion, it could be questioned. Is it possible to propose an ALT3 using the word "believed"? Flibirigit (talk) 06:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: Yes, I am agreeable to the proposal. ALT3a "... that City Developments Limited is believed to be the first to introduce the usage of show houses in Asia in 1965? Source: Window shopping for homes - The Straits Times, 12 December 1965 via NewspaperSG archives" ALT3b "... that City Developments Limited is believed to be one of the first to introduce the usage of show houses in Asia in 1965? Source: Window shopping for homes - The Straits Times, 12 December 1965 via NewspaperSG archives"– robertsky (talk) 08:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Approving ALT3a and ALT3b. Both hooks are properly cited, mentioned inline and verified with the newspaper source. Article adheres to all other DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 09:15, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:City Developments Limited/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Willbb234 (talk · contribs) 23:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Happy to review this article for GA. Expect comments soon. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 23:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Willbb234, thanks! Looking forward to the review. – robertsky (talk) 04:35, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Lede

• Per MOS:LEDELENGTH, the lede section is too short. You could add some details about its historysuch as when it was founded etc.

For the lead, would this paragraph work:

City Developments Limited, also commonly referred to by its abbreviation, CDL, or as CityDev, is a Singaporean multinational real estate operating organisation. Founded in 1963, CDL first developed projects in Johor Bahru, Malaysia and Singapore. Due to geo-political changes, CDL was making a loss before being controlled by Hong Leong Bank via shares acquisition in 1969. Since then, CDL has developed many types of properties from shopping malls to integrated developments.

– robertsky (talk) 06:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

@Robertsky: sounds much better. How about a mention of the chairman and its headquarters at Republic Plaza? Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 11:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Willbb234, I have updated the lead in the article. – robertsky (talk) 17:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

References

History

• in November the same year to in November of the same year.
• in Johor Bahru, Malaysia, a 200-unit bungalow the comma here should be a semi-colon.
• the concept of "show house" to the concept of a "show house".
• It allows prospective buyers to preview how a property would look like before committing themselves to buy the property. this sentence needs to be copyedited. For example, changing 'buy' to 'buying' and removing 'themselves'.
• It proceeded to build its second project to It built its second project
• Riding on the strong economic growth 'riding' isn't the correct word as it isn't formal enough.
  • @Willbb234: How about 'Capitalising on the strong economic growth? – robertsky (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
    • 'Capitalising' seems more appropriate. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
• Its flagship building, the Republic Plaza, no need for 'the' here.
• Millennium & Copthorne Hotels (M&C) was eventually floated London Stock Exchange (LSE) in 1996, and more hotel properties and brands were acquired and consolidated under M&C.[18] M&C also would come to manage hotels owned by other firms across the world. this part has no relevance without reading on to find out that M&C was later acquired by CDL.
  • Will a bridging bit prior to this do? i.e. 'Leveraging on the Millennium and Copthorne brand, CDL listed a new subsidiary, Millennium & Copthorne Hotels (M&C) on London Stock Exchange (LSE) in 1996. More hotel properties and brands were acquired...' – robertsky (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
    • yes, introducing it in some capacity, albeit moderately, would help. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
• hospitality related Internet businesses 'Internet' shouldn't be capitalised here.
• CDL weathered through a recession weathered isn't an encyclopaedic word. In fact, I think you can combine this sentence with the next one by saying something like During the financial crisis of 2007–2008, its financial performance...
• chief operating officer (CEO) this should be COO.
  • Opps. should be chief exec. Made a mistake somehow. – robertsky (talk) 03:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
• as part of Kwek family's the Kwek family's
• it does not already own. to it did not already own
• LSE on 11 October 2019 no need to include the year here as it is mentioned in the previous sentence.
• one of whom is Kwek Leng Peck, this should say 'was' as it happened in the past.
• CDL would eventually score itself A grades in 2019 for perspective and comparison, you should include some details here about the fact that "The company is one of more than 170 that made it to CDP's annual "A List"" per this source.
• Reasons for this included increase in energy usage. you should rephrase this; either Among the reasons for this was an increase in energy use or The reason for this was an increase in energy use depending on what the source says.
• CDL was one of the first companies in Singapore to be recognised for gender equality efforts the source for this is dead for me. Also, it is quite vague and what do you mean by "one of the first companies". How many others were there? How is this known for certain? etc.
  • @Willbb234: huh... that's unexpected... I have included the archive link for that source: [1]. The 2018 list of companies is in Bloomberg's press release. Going through the list, CDL and DBS are the only two names I recognise on eyeballing. Should I include this, and possibly risk a knock for primary source or synthesis? – robertsky (talk) 14:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
    • How about something like CDL was recognised for...? This avoids confusion surrounding other companies who were recipients. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 00:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

      Willbb234, concise and clear. done. – robertsky (talk) 03:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Group structure

• carpark equipment you need to be more specific here. Equipment usually refers to smaller items, and thus this doesn't really make sense.
  • @Willbb234: They are indeed equipment. Unfortunately, beyond the article, it doesn't mention the actual equipment being tested and developed. What I can dig up is that the carpark equipment is probably the ones listed in its subsidiary's page, [2] and partially mirrored on its own website [3]. Should I include an example, i.e. carpark equipment, such as pay and display machines – robertsky (talk) 15:03, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Yes, that sounds fine. The issue I have is that equipment, at least for me, refers to objects that can be moved around and used and thus are usually smaller. If that's what the ref says, then I guess it's fine, however. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 00:11, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
• Aer Lingus sold the Copthorne Hotels no need for 'the' here.
• Millennium & Copthorne Hotels (M&C) was eventually floated London Stock Exchange doesn't make sense.
• related Internet businesses. 'Internet' shouldn't be capitalised.

@Robertsky: sorry, for the delay. Here are the final comments. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 13:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

• In 2019, CDL took M&C private, turning M&C a wholly owned subsidiary repetition of M&C, this could be replaced with 'it'. Also, the sentence doesn't quite make sense as you should include a world like 'into'.
• Wikilink to Sengkang.
• The condo and mall 'condo' is considered informal language.
• are on into an integrated development not quite sure what you're trying to say here?
• Remove duplicate wikilink to Liang Court and to Singapore dollar (S$).

Notable projects

• You should combine the smaller sub-sections in this section into one paragraph or several smaller paragraphs. Single sentence sub-sections make the article look bare.
• CDL boasts a wide array of malls, this isn't WP:NPOV.
• There are some duplicate wikilinks in this section that need removing.

References

• There are several references to the CDL website. Preferably, these should be removed and replaced if possible.
• Likewise with the CapitaLand references

Additions: succession plan and Sincere investments

@Willbb234: There are major events since the last time I worked on this article in July 2020, primarily that of investments into Sincere Property Group and follow-up news. I have included this in Special:Diff/1012109962 alongside with a paragraph on succession planning by the Kwek family as I was reviewing sources. I am not sure if the succession planning bit is WP:UNDUE here. On Sincere, I believe I have covered the major points so far, and there should not be major changes except for copy-editing (except if there are new news). Do let me know your thoughts on the addition. – robertsky (talk) 17:39, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

@Robertsky: okay, thanks for letting me know. I'll continue writing comments for the rest of the section above. Here are my comments concerning the new material:

• • In November 2020, Deloitte & Touche was appointed as an external advisor to evaluate on CDL's investments into Sincere,[38] and later determined that further value could be extracted from Sincere I think this is quite trivial, especially when it isn't talked about very much in this source.
  • to address the amount of debt built up by the real estate sector in the country in what time period?
  • I don't think the details of the Chinese guidelines are particularly relevant here as their impact is rather speculative.
    • @Willbb234: the guidelines, through in draft state, have been moved ahead as per noted in this article. Though speculative, it has an impact on the real estate industry in China with various companies moving to meet the guidelines. (See: [4]). Nonetheless, to avoid turning this into a mini article about the three red lines, I have rewrote the part to show that CDL had concerns with the Sincere's liqudity position. Removed is R&T audit. – robertsky (talk) 03:19, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@Robertsky: there are a couple more comments for you to look at then I will promote this to GA. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 13:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Willbb234, apologies for the slip. been busy irl lately. i will dedicate my weekend for this. – robertsky (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)